Target selection for A-Bombs
DvdThomas
Recently got into a discussion regarding whether Japan was a preferred
target for use of atomic weapons because of racial factors, to put it
plainly. I am aware that the two bombs used in August of 1945 were
completed only a short time before, and thus could not have been used
before the Germans were defeated. It also seems doubtful that a decision
to use them on the "monkey people" versus "whites like us" would hardly
have been mentioned in any official accounts. What I'm wondering is if
anyone has references to commentary on this subject.
Thanks much.
David Thomas
HAncock4
Per the question of whether the a-bombs were intended for Japan?
1) The bomb was originally developed to be used against Germany. The war
ended before it could be deployed.
2) The bomb was used as soon as it was finished.
Thomas Hamilton
In article <5agbfu$h...@nina.pagesz.net> dvdt...@aol.com (DvdThomas) writes:
>Recently got into a discussion regarding whether Japan was a preferred
>target for use of atomic weapons because of racial factors, to put it
>plainly....... It also seems doubtful that a decision
>to use them on the "monkey people" versus "whites like us" would hardly
>have been mentioned in any official accounts. What I'm wondering is if
>anyone has references to commentary on this subject.
This theory has only become popular since the demise of the USSR. (Before
1991 conspiracy theorists explained Hiroshima as an anti-Communist plot.)
Consequently, the race theory is not discussed in standard references such
as Martin Sherwin's _A World Destroyed_ or Richard Rhodes _The Making of the
Atomic Bomb_.
No one charged Oppenheimer et al. with being racially motivated during their
lifetimes, so there are no really informed comments by the participants.
Of course, Oppenheimer and some other participants clearly felt badly about
participating in the project, it would be odd if they concealed racist
motives.
Also, since the original Einstein letter clearly envisioned using the bomb
against Germany, since many of the bomb builders were explicitly anti-Nazi,
and since the bombing of Dresden seems to indicate that the US was perfectly
willing to bomb white civilians, it is only recently, when much of this has
been forgotten, that the race theory has become plausible to the public.
Even so, advocates of the race theory rarely discuss the personalities of
the members of the targetting committee or the practice of strategic bombing
in general. Usually they like to pick out racist comments by individual
Marines who had little contact with Stimson, Oppenheimer, Groves, or Marshall.
The depressing truth is that the US never considered _not_ using the bomb
against whomever it was at war. Truman stated that explicitly and all
reputable historians agree. While many argue that the dropping of the bomb
_should_ have been a subject of great debate in 1945, all agree that the
record is clear that it _wasn't_.
The race theory has been associated with Roland Takaki <sp?>, a professor
of "ethnic studies" at Berkeley who clearly neither knows nor cares about
US military history.
From ww2-su...@bacchus.acpub.duke.edu Thu Jan 2 23:53 CST 1997
Received: from watson.bcm.tmc.edu (BCM.TMC.EDU [128.249.2.1]) by hermes.bcm.tmc.edu (8.7.6/8.6.11) with ESMTP id XAA12414 for <ri...@mail.bcm.tmc.edu>; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 23:53:44 -0600 (CST)
Received: from bacchus.acpub.duke.edu (bacchus.acpub.duke.edu [152.3.100.2]) by watson.bcm.tmc.edu (8.7.6/8.6.6) with ESMTP id XAA01592 for <ri...@bcm.tmc.edu>; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 23:53:40 -0600 (CST)
Received: (from daemon@localhost)
by bacchus.acpub.duke.edu (8.8.4/Duke-4.0) id AAA14430;
Fri, 3 Jan 1997 00:53:40 -0500
Received: from heinlein.acpub.duke.edu (heinlein.acpub.duke.edu [152.3.233.9])
by bacchus.acpub.duke.edu (8.8.4/Duke-4.0) with ESMTP id AAA14337;
Fri, 3 Jan 1997 00:44:35 -0500
Received: from relay1.UU.NET (relay1.UU.NET [192.48.96.5])
by heinlein.acpub.duke.edu (8.8.4/Duke-4.0) with ESMTP id AAA03990;
Fri, 3 Jan 1997 00:40:53 -0500 (EST)
Received: from gap.cco.caltech.edu by relay1.UU.NET with ESMTP
(peer crosschecked as: gap.cco.caltech.edu [131.215.139.43])
id QQbwvu11948; Fri, 3 Jan 1997 00:40:46 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from news@localhost) by gap.cco.caltech.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id VAA02551; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 21:40:26 -0800 (PST)
To: soc-history-wa...@uunet.uu.net
Path: surya!tth
From: t...@surya.caltech.edu (Thomas Hamilton)
Newsgroups: soc.history.war.world-war-ii
Subject: Re: Target selection for A-Bombs
Date: 3 Jan 1997 05:40:25 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Lines: 43
Message-ID: <5ai649$2...@gap.cco.caltech.edu>
References: <5agbfu$h...@nina.pagesz.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: surya.caltech.edu
Sender: ww2-su...@acpub.duke.edu
Precedence: bulk
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 2290
Status: ORSr
In article <5agbfu$h...@nina.pagesz.net> dvdt...@aol.com (DvdThomas) writes:
>Recently got into a discussion regarding whether Japan was a preferred
>target for use of atomic weapons because of racial factors, to put it
>plainly....... It also seems doubtful that a decision
>to use them on the "monkey people" versus "whites like us" would hardly
>have been mentioned in any official accounts. What I'm wondering is if
>anyone has references to commentary on this subject.
This theory has only become popular since the demise of the USSR. (Before
1991 conspiracy theorists explained Hiroshima as an anti-Communist plot.)
Consequently, the race theory is not discussed in standard references such
as Martin Sherwin's _A World Destroyed_ or Richard Rhodes _The Making of the
Atomic Bomb_.
No one charged Oppenheimer et al. with being racially motivated during their
lifetimes, so there are no really informed comments by the participants.
Of course, Oppenheimer and some other participants clearly felt badly about
participating in the project, it would be odd if they concealed racist
motives.
Also, since the original Einstein letter clearly envisioned using the bomb
against Germany, since many of the bomb builders were explicitly anti-Nazi,
and since the bombing of Dresden seems to indicate that the US was perfectly
willing to bomb white civilians, it is only recently, when much of this has
been forgotten, that the race theory has become plausible to the public.
Even so, advocates of the race theory rarely discuss the personalities of
the members of the targetting committee or the practice of strategic bombing
in general. Usually they like to pick out racist comments by individual
Marines who had little contact with Stimson, Oppenheimer, Groves, or Marshall.
The depressing truth is that the US never considered _not_ using the bomb
against whomever it was at war. Truman stated that explicitly and all
reputable historians agree. While many argue that the dropping of the bomb
_should_ have been a subject of great debate in 1945, all agree that the
record is clear that it _wasn't_.
The race theory has been associated with Roland Takaki <sp?>, a professor
of "ethnic studies" at Berkeley who clearly neither knows nor cares about
US military history.
Dirk Lorek
t...@surya.caltech.edu (Thomas Hamilton) wrote:
>The race theory has been associated with Roland Takaki <sp?>, a professor
>of "ethnic studies" at Berkeley who clearly neither knows nor cares about
>US military history.
I can't comment on the A-bombs, but in regard to conventional bombing
there was IMO a considerable difference in the approach by the USAAF.
In the ETO, the USAAF performed deliberate area bombings seldom, it
concentrated on industrial precision bombing and incendiaries were not
used often either.
In the Pacific in 45, the USAAF flew the heaviest air raids of WW2
using mostly incendiaries and napalm against Japanese cities.
While I imagine that the vast majority of German civilians lost their
lives due to RAF bombings, Japan lost 300 000 civilians within 5
months due to USAAF firebombing raids.
Racial motives? I don't know.
Dirk
_________________________________________________________________________
Witze aus dem 3. Reich 17: Ganz Deutschland ist eine Strassenbahn.
Vorne steht der Fuehrer. Hinter ihm steht das Volk. Wer nicht hinter
ihm steht, der sitzt. Alle paar Minuten wird kassiert. Das Abspringen
waehrend der Fahrt ist verboten.
Arthur D. Jacobs
In article <5am44n$9...@nntp1.u.washington.edu> DiL...@pobox.com (Dirk Lorek) writes:
>From: DiL...@pobox.com (Dirk Lorek)
>Subject: Re: Target selection for A-Bombs
>Date: 4 Jan 1997 17:31:03 GMT
>t...@surya.caltech.edu (Thomas Hamilton) wrote:
>>The race theory has been associated with Roland Takaki <sp?>, a professor
>>of "ethnic studies" at Berkeley who clearly neither knows nor cares about
>>US military history.
>In the Pacific in 45, the USAAF flew the heaviest air raids of WW2
>using mostly incendiaries and napalm against Japanese cities.
>While I imagine that the vast majority of German civilians lost their
>lives due to RAF bombings, Japan lost 300 000 civilians within 5
>months due to USAAF firebombing raids
Realizing that this argument started with "racial motives" and ended with
USAAF firebombing raids; I still considered important to interject that one of
the major bombs, Atomic bomb, dropped on Nagasaki affected military and
industrial targets.
For example, examins the URL
<http://foitimes/nagasaki.htm> for a rare and unique sample of photographs
depicting the impact on Nagasaki's industrial and defense
infrastructure.
In any event, my view is that it was war--war started by others and "ended" by
the U.S.. If this is "racism" so be it.
Art
Les Mills
In article <5agbfu$h...@nina.pagesz.net>, dvdt...@aol.com (DvdThomas) wrote:
>Recently got into a discussion regarding whether Japan was a preferred
>target for use of atomic weapons because of racial factors, to put it
>plainly.
The Manhatten Project proposal was authorized by FDR on December 6, 1941
for possible use against the Germans. Germany was seen as the greater
threat at the moment, and FDR (and more than a few others) were concerned
about Germany's efforts in developing an atomic bomb. The German efforts
were later discovered to be exaggerated, but the initial target of the
Atomic bomb was anticipated to be Germany.
>I am aware that the two bombs used in August of 1945 were
>completed only a short time before, and thus could not have been used
>before the Germans were defeated.
You are correct. The US didn't even test the first bomb until
months after Germany's surrender.
>It also seems doubtful that a decision
>to use them on the "monkey people" versus "whites like us" would hardly
>have been mentioned in any official accounts.
About the only thing close to an "official" account that I've read was
an exerpt from Canadian Prime Minister MacKenzie King's diary, which
expressed the PM's relief that such a weapon wasn't used against "our
white bretheren", among other things. Of course, this was the PM who
had dialogs with his dog and dead mother, so I'd question his
perception of reality, to say the least. He also wasn't one of the
people who was involved in the decision to drop the bomb. However,
some proponent's of the "racial" theory use his statement, so it's
best to know its origins and (ir)relevence to Truman's decision.
>What I'm wondering is if
>anyone has references to commentary on this subject.
(.sig deleted)
Look at almost any book dealing with the Atomic bomb. "Operation Downfall"
goes into the history before the Atomic bomb, and the decisions made to
drop it. It does deal with the racial overtones to the war, but suggests
that the Atomic bombs were seen simply as a powerful tool to assist the
inevitable invasion more than any racial influence.
--
Leslie Mills
"Eat properly. Exercise regularly. Die anyway."
Per Andersson
DiL...@pobox.com (Dirk Lorek) wrote:
>I can't comment on the A-bombs, but in regard to conventional bombing
>there was IMO a considerable difference in the approach by the USAAF.
(snip)
>Racial motives? I don't know.
Probably not. AFAIK the Japanese industry was very dispersed within
the cities, so it is probable that the goal was the same for both the
European and Pacific bombings. The difference in tactics was then only
a response to different conditions.
Per Andersson
Dirk Lorek
pan...@ts.umu.se (Per Andersson) wrote:
>AFAIK the Japanese industry was very dispersed within
>the cities, so it is probable that the goal was the same for both the
>European and Pacific bombings. The difference in tactics was then only
>a response to different conditions.
I would imagine that the shipyards, the Mitsubishi-, Kawasaki-,
Nakajima factories etc were quite big complexes, located outside the
city centers and easy to hit in 45. Surely the Japanese war machine
was not run by small city-workshops? Unfortunately I'm not very
familiar with the strategic bombing of Japan. Anyone knows if the big
industrial complexes were attacked specifically (provided they existed
:-)?
Dirk
________________________________________________________________________
Witze aus dem 3. Reich 19: 'Wenn Ihr Roosevelt eine SS haette wie
unserer Fuehrer, dann gaebe es in den USA keine Gangster mehr!'
'Bestimmt nicht', erwiederte der Amerikaner hoeflich, 'die waeren dann
alle laengst Standartenfuehrer.'
Larry W. Jewell
Some one mentioned:
UNITED STATES STRATEGIC BOMBING SURVEY
SUMMARY REPORT
(Pacific War)
It is on-line at:
http://www.pressenter.com/~anesi/ussbs01.htm
Haven't the expertise on the topic to tell how good the reproduction is.
Can someone knowledgeble give us a review?
Larry (typing one-handed) J
--
LWJE...@OMNI.CC.PURDUE.EDU; Pearl Harbor Working Group Webmaster.
"Sunday's horoscope is note worthy because of its strange, sudden and wholly
unpredictable and inexplicable occurrences, affecting all phases of life."
Your Horoscope" L.A. Evening Herald Express, Sat, 12/06/41
DvdThomas
>In any event, my view is that it was war--war started by others and
"ended" by
>the U.S.. If this is "racism" so be it.
>
>Art
As the person who started this thread, I'd like to clarify something. I
have no particular interest in the study of racism. The question was
posed as the result of a chance remark in a discussion on totally
unrelated issues. I was asked, as a comparison to something else, whether
I thought there was any racial element involved that made the dropping of
the bombs on Japanese less objectionable than it would have been in
Europe. My opinion was that it was very possible, given the success of
the vilification campaign of the enemy, which is a normal component of
every war (rendering "them" into an "it" makes the task of destruction
psychologically more acceptable), and which had strong overtones of racism
in this case. A reference to cartoons and the steady stream of derogatory
descriptions of the Japanese will verify this for any who are interested.
My earlier reference to the "monkey people" is taken directly from some
wartime rhetoric which appeared not only in government output, but the
mainstream media. It was quite a different world then, and things were
routinely accepted that would be unimaginable today. There are references
in a well done volume on German POWs held in this country about a problem
encountered when they saw the treatment accorded blacks here. Some of
them sarcastically threw this back at their captors, asking how they could
be so accusative in the reeducation classes the POWs were put through when
there was an obvious problem with tolerance in America.
In any case, there was no inference, direct or implied, that there were
racial motivations involved in the onset of the war, or its conduct in
general.
I'll observe that a nuclear weapon dropped in Europe would put at some
risk friendly elements of the population there, armed and civilian, which
was not the case in Japan, save for some number of prisoners. Even though
our appreciation of the effects of fallout and residual radiation at the
time was limited, it was still recognized that there would be a degree of
danger after and beyond the blast area, that it was not a "clean" device.
Another observation that has come out of discussions here and elsewhere is
that opposition to firebombing in Europe was openly expressed by a number
of military commanders, but as yet I cannot reference the same kind of
reaction to the firebombing of Japan (whereas negative comments about use
of the atom bombs abound). Can anyone comment on this?
>Realizing that this argument started with "racial motives" and ended with
>USAAF firebombing raids; I still considered important to interject that
one of
>the major bombs, Atomic bomb, dropped on Nagasaki affected military and
>industrial targets.
No doubt that both items were present in or near a large city (though to a
lesser degree in Nagasaki than most), but I hardly think that was even
near the top of considerations for the dropping of either bomb. The
intent was to demonstrate that a city could be destroyed in a literal
flash by one bomb and one plane. The human loss and strategic damages
were side effects of the action, not its motivation.
Best wishes,
David Thomas